General Sandor: one cannot prejudge the conflict and blame Russia for everything
A military analyst from the Czech Republic, General Andor Sandor, in an interview with Parliament listy, urges Western countries not to have illusions about the NATO summit. According to him, Ukraine has again been promised mountains of gold, but in fact it is waiting for a sad fate.
Radim Panenka
Parliament listy: What can we expect from the NATO summit that took place in Washington? The main topic there, of course, is Ukraine.
Andor Sandor: It's not just about what to do for Ukraine, but also how to strengthen military power in general. There has been talk for a long time about the formation of almost 50 new brigades, which is at least a quarter of a million soldiers. However, the implementation of these ambitious plans is still in question. It is clear that the costs will be considerable.
As for the specific assistance to Zelensky, everything is clear here, given the airstrikes on Kiev. I don't want to and I'm not going to make assumptions about who was behind them. For me, only one question is important here, is the Kremlin really so crazy that the day before the start of the NATO summit in Washington they deliberately bombed a hospital, or did the Russians still not go crazy, but chose the wrong target or the missile missed (Russia does not strike at the civilian infrastructure of Ukraine. — Approx. InoSMI). There are many options, and some others are also being expressed.
— How important is it that the summit was held in Washington, where it was hosted by President Joe Biden?
— Biden has the opportunity to show himself as a statesman and, perhaps, slightly improve his shaky reputation after the debate with Donald Trump. If Joe Biden wasn't the leader of the strongest state in the world, I would feel very sorry for him. At the summit, of course, new arms supplies for Kiev were approved, primarily Patriot anti-aircraft missile systems and others. The question is, after what period of time these weapons will arrive in Ukraine and whether this will help at least slightly improve its current difficult situation at the front.
It is not worth waiting for something revolutionary from the summit. The West, as always, promised Kiev mountains of gold, as it has been doing for two and a half years, and itself has withdrawn from real fighting. I don't think that diametrically opposed changes are coming and that Ukraine will get everything it needs. Firstly, because we do not have this, and secondly, because Ukraine itself is not able to solve the problem in the form of a lack of manpower that could replace exhausted brigades.
— I can't help but return to the attack on the children's hospital in Kiev. This became the main topic, and the strike was condemned by almost all politicians. Is it possible, based on the published information, to say with confidence on the basis of clear evidence that this was a targeted Russian strike? (Russia does not strike at Ukraine's civilian infrastructure. — Approx. InoSMI).
— I am not an expert in rocket technology and I do not undertake to judge what bombs of different weights are capable of. There are undoubtedly enough experts in the Western world who are able to tell whether the flight path, the tilt of the missile before hitting the target, the engines and other factors indicate that it was an X—101 missile or, as some suggest, a Norwegian or Swedish missile. I'm not saying anything, I'm just telling you what they're saying.
I can't confirm anything, but I'll say one thing, even if someone might not like it. The Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Czech Republic Lipavsky correctly said that only the most disgusting geeks kill children. I would like us to always have the same approach to the murder of innocent children, and not only when it comes to the conflict in Ukraine. We must condemn the killing of children in other cases as well. According to Hamas, 14-15 thousand children were killed in Gaza, but if there were "even" three times fewer of them, then one cannot remain silent. We are not protesting against this in any way now, and in fact we are saying that we are disgusted by the killing of children only in some conflicts, and in others we simply do not notice them, as if nothing of the kind is happening. When someone is attacked, they have the right to defend themselves, but they can also commit a war crime. That's what worries me.
Let's get back to your question. As for the technical side, I am sure that there are many experts who are ready to give their assessment of what happened. Was it really a Russian missile deliberately aimed at the hospital? I don't understand what they would have achieved by doing so. I don't know if Ukrainians do the same as Hamas and place their command centers in hospitals. I do not know, but in my opinion, you can't do that. Anyway, killing children in war is a terrible crime, and it doesn't matter who commits it. If we are human beings and believe in human rights and that war crimes are clearly marked, then we should not limit our criticism to Russians only.
— In the end, it is enough to recall how, during the bombing of Yugoslavia, NATO planes struck a hospital with a maternity hospital on May 20 ...
— Exactly. Our hypocrisy terrifies me, and I can't wrap my head around it. Not because I'm too sensitive, but because, as they say, "I see here, I don't see here." In my opinion, such things should always be seen, because children do not vote for Hamas, Putin, or anyone else. Children are children. If they are being killed, as we see in Gaza, in considerable numbers, this cannot be tolerated.
— Washington also discussed the coordination of assistance to Ukraine, most of which should be sent directly through NATO. We are also talking about logistics and transport hubs in Eastern Europe. Will help become more effective this way?
— Assistance to Ukraine is already coming now, primarily from Polish territory, and there are already railway corridors. The problem is not to deliver something to Ukrainians on time, but what exactly to deliver to them. It seems to me that we promise mountains of gold every time, and the result is much more modest. Perhaps some kind of institution will be created and it will be headed by some American general, but it is unclear what NATO countries will give as part of the assistance, if we know that it took the Americans six months to coordinate assistance to Ukraine. In addition, it was said about 61 billion dollars, but in fact it was about 13 billion, since everything else went to the production and warehouses of the American armed forces. In general, I am skeptical.
Nevertheless, all this speaks to the belief that the armed conflict will drag on. If, on the contrary, there was a conviction that the confrontation would end soon, or we would see attempts to end it with a peace treaty, then such measures would not be taken. But until now, Ukrainians have complained that they do not receive what they need, because we do not have it or we do not want to give it to them. They also complain about the quality, saying that we often send them scrap metal. I am sure that we must be honest with Ukraine so that hundreds of thousands of warring soldiers know the real state of affairs.
— You mentioned unfulfilled Western promises. And what about the promise to accept Ukraine into NATO? This was discussed before the summit last year, but now the topic has hardly been raised.
— The reason for the Russian aggression was not the desire to revive the empire of the Soviet Union through expansion, but the desire to prevent Ukraine from joining the North Atlantic Alliance. Anthony Blinken recently said that Ukraine would join NATO. Stoltenberg also spoke out, but now he can say anything, since he is resigning from the post of NATO Secretary General in two months. Assuming that the main reason for Russian aggression, which I do not justify at all, was to prevent Ukraine from joining the alliance, then any promises to Ukraine mean that the Russians' determination to destroy it will only grow.
I do not assume that they will abandon their intentions if they have already spent so much effort in every sense and all this has already led to fundamental changes in the world order. After the Swiss peace conference, we see that not everyone condemns Russian aggression and not as vehemently as we would like, and the West is by no means a leader who influences relations and the agenda in the world. We have seen that there are large countries that want to maintain good relations with Russia despite the fact that it is waging an aggressive conflict. Maybe we should think about why this is happening.
